The Delta variant has caused infections to surge in multiple countries, and is even driving up hospitalisations in some U.S. states, notably Florida. (Although that state has a vaccination rate only 10 percentage points lower than the U.K., vaccinations are not as concentrated among the elderly as they are here.)
What should we make of the surge of infections, and indeed hospitalisations, caused by the Delta variant? In a recent blog post, the economist Tyler Cowen argues that things aren’t quite as simple as many people – or at least many lockdown proponents – are assuming.
Cowen notes, “Even the growth of hospitalisations, much less the growth in cases, is a misleading signal for how well we are doing.” Why is that? As Cowen argues, “it is better to get a given amount of Covid over with more quickly rather than less quickly … subject to the constraint that you do not overwhelm your hospital system.”
All else being equal, the faster Covid spreads among people who do not yet have immunity (either from vaccination or natural infection), the shorter the time for which the healthcare system is under stress, and the faster immunity builds up in the population as a whole. Assuming, that is, your hospitals aren’t overwhelmed.
Interestingly, Cowen’s argument is not dissimilar to the Great Barrington Declaration. That document notes: “As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls.” And we should therefore allow “those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection”.
I say “interestingly” because Cowen previously criticised the Declaration, claiming that it “strikes exactly the wrong tone and stresses exactly the wrong points”. However, he would presumably say the situation is different now (we have vaccines), and letting the virus spread among people who are voluntarily unvaccinated is not the same as letting it spread among people who haven’t yet been offered a vaccine.
I still maintain that focused protection trumps lockdown regardless of whether a vaccine is available, given the limited efficacy and substantial harms of lockdown. But it’s good to see Cowen acknowledge the case for building up immunity more quickly.
His observations raise the question of whether Western countries should have encouraged young people to gain immunity through natural infection in the spring/summer of 2020 (or at the very least not discouraged them through protracted lockdowns). If we’d taken a more relaxed approach then, we might have been in a better position entering the winter of 2020.
Lockdown sceptics will find several things to disagree with in Cowen’s blog post, but it’s still worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Sounds like he’s advocating going back to the Official Truth of April 2020 (“three weeks to flatten the curve and save the NHS”).
Better than the Official Truths that have come since, perhaps, but going back to the pre-panic plain truth would be better.
Delta variant? The PCR test is not designed to test for Covid in the first place, let alone so-called variants
Responsible journalism, RIP By Liz Hodgkinson
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/responsible-journalism-rip/
Stand in South Hill Park Bracknell every Sunday from 10am meet fellow anti lockdown freedom lovers, keep yourself sane, make new friends and have a laugh.
Join our Stand in the Park – Bracknell – Telegram Group
http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell
One reason hospitalisations are a poor measure of how serious things are (albeit better than the nonsensical pearl-clutching about “cases”, aka positive tests via a shonky test procedure) is that the criteria on which a decision to admit someone to hospital are made vary over time and one of the factors which cause it to vary is how busy the hospitals are.
At the peak of the pandemic last year it’s not in question that hospitals were busy with COVID patients and that a great many COVID patients were not admitted (either because they avoided hospital altogether due to the lockdowns, or they simply weren’t admitted by the health services because there was no space).
However now that the pandemic is largely over everywhere in terms of serious illness, and treatment of COVID has improved, people who last year would not have been admitted are now being admitted and treated. However their symptoms are in general less serious and typically after a short period of treatment they are discharged. There is anecdotal evidence of this in our NHS (although not in the mainstream news, obviously).
In short, if hospital beds are empty, they will be filled.
There is also the possibility (remote I know) that hospital admission figures are manipulated to support the “narrative”. After all, we have seen plenty of other figures being manipulated over the last 18 months. What exactly is a “COVID admission” after all? Someone who reported to the hospital with COVID symptoms? Or someone who coincidentally tested positive while they were there for a different reason, or who caught COVID in hospital?
In the end the least bad measure of whether there is an epidemic any more or not is all causes mortality, and those numbers have been “normal” in the UK and most of Europe since March.
“What exactly is a COVID admission?” Add to the list people admitted for other reasons who happened to have had a positive covid ‘test’ result within the past 14 (? or whatever figure they choose to apply) days but have no symptoms.
In short, if hospital beds are empty, they will be filled.
An optimist, I presume? If hospital beds are empty the cost-savers will call that excess capacity and demand that they must be removed. They’re still routinely doing that in Germany, pandemic notwithstanding.
“His observations raise the question of whether Western countries should have encouraged young people to gain immunity through natural infection in the spring/summer of 2020″
Absolutely we should have! I was was screaming that at the TV screen last summer when the usual suspects were prattling on about whether students should go back to uni etc, and whether there should be face to face learning. I said all along that we should have divided the country into 2, those over and under 40. Under the line no restrictions go about your everyday lives. Over 40 some restrictions and encouragement to WFH etc. Let the people who are not at risk catch the disease and create a mass of immunity within the population that will help suppress outbreaks in the future.
It would also have had the beneficial side effect of rebalancing society away from its current old people bias. If the only people who could work in certain types of work (hospitality etc) are young people, then the demand for young workers would go through the roof. Plus would mean young people given more promotions – lets say you’re 55 and own a pub. Will you a) close up because you can’t work in that environment, or promote one of your younger staff to run it for you, and stay open?
But no, it was ‘better’ to take all the people at zero risk and try and stop them getting a disease by destroying their futures.
Yes I wrote an email to my MP last summer saying exactly that. In fact that was the point where I first suspected all was not as it seemed. Until that point while I didn’t agree on all of the lockdown measures I could at least accept the possibility that bad decisions had been made at the beginning due to the unknown nature of the virus.
But last summer was really when the policies started to diverge from common sense and it became apparent to me that what was going on was no longer about a “public health crisis”. Rather than removing all restrictions in the summer months and letting the virus spread through young people at a time of high vitamin D levels and low NHS occupation, they maintained many restrictions and introduced masks, signalling that they _wanted_ the “crisis” or rather the fear of a crisis to continue.
That was a real red flag moment.
I suggest a more innocent (or more condemning, depending on how one looks at it) explanation: The mask mandate was a token measure to appease the union (leaders) demanding it. It started with TfL customers[*] being commanded to wrap something around their faces for the supposed benefit of bus drivers who were specifically exempted from this requirement.
Nobody ever really believed it would actually be good for something beyond that.
[*] considering the usual protect others claim, the implied statement is Not-so-dear TfL users, you are an entirely expendable danger to TfL employees and may well die a gruesome death for all the union cares.
“ they maintained many restrictions and introduced masks, signalling that they _wanted_ the “crisis” or rather the fear of a crisis to continue.”
I have a feeling that there was a desire to keep the crisis going in order to be able to introduce the vaccines (which they knew were in the pipeline) under the ’emergency use’ exemption. If they had let covid rip through the under 40s last summer and early autumn then by the time the vaccines were ready at Christmas the crisis could have been demonstrably over, and they could have faced challenges as to the vaccine’s legality. They needed the ’emergency’ to be ongoing.
And they still do seeing as they have ordered all those boosters for the next few years.
Yes, they have decided somehow that no one shall ever get unwell again and immune systems are such a thing of the past. I think they have a shock coming their way!!
Well, your approach would have clearly been better, however I still don’t agree that any government-mandated restrictions are acceptable.
The government’s job should be to present factual, accurate data, provide clear and concise guidance, and most importantly put the risks into perspective.
Then it should be for each individual and family to make their own decisions accordingly.
My company’s HR Director has just sent out an email to all employees demanding to see a copy of their Covid Passport … and so it begins:
“In preparation for the proposed changes of the isolation rules, starting on 16th August 2021, in line with step 4 of the roadmap, I would like to request copies of our employees NHS COVID passports for all those that are double vaccinated. Please send me a photograph of your vaccine card or screenshot of your COVID pass from your NHS app”
The thought of that email entering my inbox scares me.
Then again I’d just ignore it because I’m not double vaccinated and it states “those that are double vaccinated….”
Oh dear, is she[*] peddling the Old Science that the double-jabbed can’t catch or spread the Chinese Virus? Hasn’t she accepted the Newly Settled Science from Public Health England that even the pure and obedient can be filthy plague rats?
She sounds like one of those crazy conspiracy theorists.
[*] HR, so I assume one of the feminine genders.
HR seems to bring out the worst in women.
Or the worst and most worthless people gravitate to it.
Yes – an extension of the old rule of thumb that those who can, do; those who can’t, teach; those who can’t even teach, go into HR.
If and when that happens to me I’ll be doing a company wide Reply All stating it’s none of their goddam business, the same as I have no right to know who within the company has HIV, Hepatitis or Herpes etc.
I’ll state I will not comply and that if my employer wishes to terminate my employment I will sue them for constructive dismissal.
If nothing else it might encourage/embolden a few more refuseniks within the company. I can only imagine the responses this might elicit from the bed wetters lol.
Interesting and difficult times ahead folks.
Send the HR director a copy of the Nuremberg Code and ask her (they’re usually women) to chew on that.
Company? Name and shame please
it’s illegal. Private Co’s (or public, e.g. NHS) are not allowed to question your medical status. Until it’s law, ignore it all the way up to tribunal.Then let them fire you, then sue the arse from under them.
Tell them ‘no’.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jMkHu0GyXw
De Santis is The One.
Covid Pass Exemption:
It is not mandatory for an individual to wear a visual cue to outline they are exempt.
You should not ask these individuals to demonstrate their COVID-19 status through the NHS App.
(Source: NHS Website)
https://www.nhsx.nhs.uk/covid-19-response/using-the-nhs-covid-pass/#exemptions
More info: https://www.LCAHub.org/
I’m afraid that Mr Cowan is now peddling the Old Science.
PHE has now agreed with the CDC that the Chinese Virus can be caught and spread even by the pure and obedient double-vacced, by replicating in the upper airways enough to jump hosts before it’s mopped up by our immune systems. That’s now Settled Science.
There’s also increasing evidence (although not yet admitted and Settled) that the Indian variant of the Chinese Virus is milder even among free range humans to the point where many people won’t even realise that it’s circulating around.
So he’s right that mass criminalisation of all normal human activity is (and always was) insane, but there’s no “getting it over with”.
It’s here, it’s not going away, but neither is it now anything that should concern a rational person prepared to take the risk of going out their front door and crossing the street.
The only action that we should take now is to stop obsessing over the Chinese Virus to the exclusion of all other issues, whether that’s of health, governance, or liberty.
If hospital systems get overwhelmed, that’s a case of the wrong kind of snow, just a lethal one. It means that the We must save costs! penny-pinchers have overdone their act to the degree that they became a public danger.
The CDC fiddled Florida’s statistics. See Mail article in round up.
To save someone the trouble of reading the COVID junk:
Over the weekend, cases aren’t being reported but just collected. They’ll be summarily reported on Monday and the usual publication convention would be to record the average for each single day without reporting. The CDC reported them all as cases on Monday thus giving the wrong impression of a sudden surge. They have since quietly adjusted their numbers.
Even worse they somehow leaked it on Sunday so the cable news at CNN. CNBC etc could use it to attack DeSantis. When it was put right of course there were no retractions. A very obvious political move, as has been the report criticised on this site this week comparing vaxed and nonvaxed, something just issued for its headlines.
The CDC used to be a non-political animal ( with all its faults) but since the appointment of a new head by Biden it is no longer. She has unilaterally declared across the nation that there can be no evictions from residential lets, with penalties from high value fines to imprisonment. How can the CDC ( a health advisory body) do this? It can’t ,legally as ruled by the Supremes, only Congress can pass such laws. But it has and no-one seems to be able to do anything about it. The rule of Law is no more, the US is currently operating outside its own laws.
I thought about that myself but didn’t want to attach speculative conclusions to the summary.
The key point was made earlier this week in an item that noted that ‘Covid’ made no distinguishable signal in terms of all-cause mortality. Noting much happened – and of course the normal process of building natural immunity was the way to go for a low consequence virus.
His observations raise the question of whether Western countries should have encouraged young people to gain immunity through natural infection in the spring/summer of 2020 (or at the very least not discouraged them through protracted lockdowns). I actually think, that’s what happened, at least where I live
Delta variant? The PCR test is not designed to test for Covid in the first place, let alone so-called variants
Responsible journalism, RIP By Liz Hodgkinson
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/responsible-journalism-rip/
Stand in South Hill Park Bracknell every Sunday from 10am meet fellow anti lockdown freedom lovers, keep yourself sane, make new friends and have a laugh.
Join our Stand in the Park – Bracknell – Telegram Group
http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell
This whole article is pointless and irrelevant unless you define what you mean by a hospital admission. A broken leg? A heart attack? All followed by a dodgy PCR test? How many admissions are 100% because of covid-19?
Is it better…?
Of course! The whole “stop the spread” narrative is nonsence.